Dick Durbin

[sleepyjeff]

Originally Posted by Scrooge McSam

You contend, if I don't misunderstand you, that the ultimate goal of the people speaking out about prison abuse is to just have these people released. That is not true. I haven't heard anyone suggest opening the doors and just turning them out. The bringing of evidence and some hearings on that evidence sure would be nice though.

Good points all......but....

... if the bringing of evidence with hearings would pose a danger to the US then what?

Ultimately it is their release that many of these people must really want....which would be fine by me if they really were innocents.....but I can't really fathom what would be the gain to anybody high up in the US government to keep innocents in a Cuban Prison???? Somebody explain that one to me please.

[wendybeth]

I suppose because they can, Jeff. It's the same mindset that had the FBI keeping files on such people as John Lennon, etc, and it's been going on for years. It's just that now they seem to think they have a mandate from the public- "Please protect us and we'll gladly give up any and all rights and liberties we posess , and screw the rest of the world- they're not Americans anyway!" I've no doubt that some nasty types are in Gitmo. I also have no doubt that there are quite a few poor, illiterate sheepherders in there as well, who just happened to get caught up in this mess. Either way, we do not give them any sort of due process whatsoever, and that is wrong. Not only is it wrong, it only reinforces what the bad guys are saying about us.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by wendybeth

we do not give them any sort of due process whatsoever, and that is wrong. Not only is it wrong, it only reinforces what the bad guys are saying about us.

No, Wendy, it isn't. They are not criminals subject to the laws of our country. They have no constitutionally gauranteed rights. They have no right to a trial (at this point, and perhaps never - just release at the end of hostilities unless they are tried for war crimes). They have no right to due process. They are not American citizens. They are not foreign nationals who committed a crime on our soil.

What they are are prisoners of war. They are not to be released until the end of hostilities.

I personally don't care about what the bad guys are saying about us, but it sure raises my ire a bit when a Senator such as Durbin says things that clearly give them aid and comfort - which is precisely why they are playing what he said on Al Jazeera.

[wendybeth]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

No, Wendy, it isn't. They are not criminals subject to the laws of our country. They have no constitutionally gauranteed rights. They have no right to a trial (at this point, and perhaps never - just release at the end of hostilities unless they are tried for war crimes). They have no right to due process. They are not American citizens. They are not foreign nationals who committed a crime on our soil.



What they are are prisoners of war. They are not to be released until the end of hostilities.

I personally don't care about what the bad guys are saying about us, but it sure raises my ire a bit when a Senator such as Durbin says things that clearly give them aid and comfort - which is precisely why they are playing what he said on Al Jazeera.

Exactly my point. They are not American citizens, therefore they are not deserving of any sort of judicial hearing or proceeding- they are being held as 'enemy combatants'. I suppose now that we've set the precedent, any other country can just grab an American citzen and make the same claim. Never mind that they are civilian engineers, or relief workers, or anything but soldiers. The people that have been seized up until now have been referred to as hostages, but by your logic they are really enemy combatants to the other side. There are at least two sides to any war, correct? I don't see them as such, and that is why I don't necessarily see all the Gitmo detainees as POW's. It's just not that black and white, and things are never as clear as a politician would lead you to believe.
Btw- since when do only Americans deserve basic civil rights? That's so frikken elitest, I don't even know how to respond. We had the good sense to draft a constitution just in case a situation like this arose, so that means only we get the special treatment?

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by wendybeth

Btw- since when do only Americans deserve basic civil rights? That's so frikken elitest, I don't even know how to respond. We had the good sense to draft a constitution just in case a situation like this arose, so that means only we get the special treatment?

Not elitist in the least. Citizenship has always had benefits for the citizens of any given country. Only American citizens are privileged t ohave the rights gauranteed by our Constitution. This is the way it has always been.

Interestingly, though, when we dare to suggest that other countries grant similar liberties to their own citizens, we are accused of trying to impose our own form of democracy and society on these other cultures. Isn't that something else that is frequently regarded as elitist?

How dare us not grant our own civil liberties to those who would attack us for trying to bring democracy and similar civil liberties to their region of the planet!

[sleepyjeff]

Originally Posted by wendybeth

I I also have no doubt that there are quite a few poor, illiterate sheepherders in there as well, who just happened to get caught up in this mess.

No doubt? You are 100% sure that innocents are being held in Cuba? I find this hard to believe because for every person we are holding in Cuba there are several hundred we questioned and released back in Afghanistan---many of which were pointing and shooting guns at our troops. If we are going to let them go why would we go around and grab innocent regular folk and then ship them to Cuba? Again, it doesn't add up. Sorry, but "just because they can" doesn't satisfy me. They wouldn't do all that just for the heck of it

[Scrooge McSam]

Originally Posted by sleepyjeff

... if the bringing of evidence with hearings would pose a danger to the US then what?

Since when did the pursuit of truth become injurious to the United States of America?

I'm not trying to be catty, but you've lost me here.